STUDY 2 - ROLE OF SCHOOL COMMITTEE
2.1 Introduction
A Ministerial decree of 2002 (no. 044/U/2002) set up a school committee in every school, both MONE and MORA. Under decentralization, school committees are expected to perform the governance function at the school level with school principals having the management function. These two work together in partnership to develop school level education quality using the concept of school/ community based management which is democratic, transparent and accountable. The Education Law of June 2003 (clause 56) gives a school or madrasah committee the role of improving the quality of education services through (i) advising, (ii) directing and (iii) supporting personnel, materials and facilities, as well as (iv) overseeing education. The direct and correct translation of "pengawasan" as "supervising/ controlling" in English mis-interprets the Indonesia sense of peer control and may over-stress the school committee's role within the school.
According to the donors 2004 review of the basic education sector, two areas need clarifying in relation to the legal designated role of school committee. First, the duties and powers of school committee are not efficient, in general terms and in relation to the school principal (World Bank, 2004 ). Second, the school committee's role in financial areas is unclear. MONE guidelines (RPP ) to clarify the new education law of 2003 are still at the revision stage and have yet to be made official or indeed available to schools and the general public. School committees have therefore been established, though not in every school, based on the above ministerial decree and the short accompanying pamphlet. How far the future guidelines will be based on those notes and how much the present situation of school committee's will need revising to take into account MONE legal requirements is of concern. It is hoped that the findings of this study will become input into both the public debate of school committees guidelines and to any district level guidelines which may also be prepared.
2.2 Major Findings
Organization structure of school committees
Generally, the school committee structure in the sampled schools tended to follow the more simple structure of the two suggestions provided in the ministerial decree, that is, three executive staff comprising a head, secretary and treasurer, with a minimum of 9 members. The alternative version provided in the decree suggests a deputy to assist/ stand in for the head. Those sampled school committees with a deputy head usually had deputies for all 3 executive members. The resource person(s) suggested in both examples was taken to be the school principal teacher (according to both the school committees and school principals sampled), rather than other persons.
Possibly, they considered that other knowledgeable, resource persons had already been elected onto the committee. The ministerial decree specifically bars school principals from being included on the school committee. The school is expected to be represented by one or more of its own teachers. One anomaly is highly visible in the suggested structures in the decree. The communication lines from the head to the executive and the members are "instructions". However, school committee is thought by many to be a means of furthering civil society and democracy, and as such presumably the executive plus members should be working together as a team rather than members just being informed of any decisions taken.
Selection of members
The overwhelming majority of school committee members were selected rather than elected. Several established Indonesian systems were used for that selection. These included selection during a pleno meeting, selection by the community (village head and leading community figures), as well as through consensus meetings where it was felt that the selection process would be quicker and those selected would be well known and capable people. Many others used the "formatur" system, wher
10 World Bank "Education Sector Review", February 2004
11 PP, Peraturan Pemerintah, government guidelines which explain in more detail particular clauses of a law
Several (vocal, prominent, influential) people were chosen to select the school committee. In a few cases, parents and those with a particular concern for education were involved in the selection process. In one case, selection criteria for the candidates were first developed by the school principal. These were used by the "formatur" to select school committee members, who in turn were legalized in a parents meeting. Another means - broad-based agreement or aklamasi - involved the school committee being selected from among parents, community and teachers. One school In Batu used a novel method. Each of the 6 classes supplied 10 names of parents or persons with a known interest in education. The 10 school committee members were then selected from these 60 names. Some school committees were selected by former BP3 (parents association) members with some of the BP3 personnel themselves becoming school committee members. In one area of Banyumas, it was reported that on the whole schools simply renamed their BP3 and widened its role, BP3 do not have to be dissolved but generally were.
Possibly the nearest to an elected school committee was in one school where ballots (kertas suara) were used although it was not clear how they had obtained the nominees, and in a second school where some parents were chosen to become school committee during a parents meeting and an election was held for the post of chair. Although several schools reported that school committee were elected rather than selected to increase the democratic process, it is not clear whether this was actually the case as some confusion surrounds the difference between the two processes, even in the minds of the national study team.
Detailed composition of school committee
The recommended minimum 9 persons for school committee was generally followed, although one private Madrasah school in Batang only had 6 persons, mostly Yayasan personnel from the foundation owning the school. The maximum number was 33 in one state school in Pacitan. A few other schools had a large number of members, ranging from 13-19 people, an odd number being suggested in the decree as important during voting. Every school committee had a least one teacher representative from their own school (see Table 2.1 below). Some schools had up to 3 of their own teacher representatives on the school committee. One school in Batang obviously felt very strongly that the school should have a strong presence on the school committee. All 9 of its teachers had been selected as the school committee; 3 of them non-permanent teachers. While open opposition to the school committee was only voiced in one school interview, this does seem to be a covert protest against the de-professionalizing of school staff as a result of central government's imposition of the school committee model.
Other schools had a relatively high number of teachers from other schools (9 on one school committee in Banyuwangi) and sometimes other school principals in order to retain their professional voice. For most school committee however, less than 50% of their total personnel had professional education knowledge, that is, they were teachers, school principals, supervisors or education Dinas officials. People with an education background were not necessarily on the executive either, where they could have a greater voice in discussions and decision making because of the cultural deference for hierarchy, especially in less urban areas. Only 1/3rd of heads and secretaries came from an education background while just under half of treasurers did.
There was no stipulation in the ministerial decree on the representation of women on the school committee. Not only are all school committees dominated by males but some did not even have a minimum of one female. Considering that a majority of primary school teachers are women and that mothers more often than fathers collect their children's school reports and talk with teachers, and not forgetting the need for positive female role models outside the home to motivate girl children to achieve their potential (see Suhero's paper for further comments on this omission ). It is to be hoped that the MONE guidelines will make a clear statement regarding the inclusion of a minimum number of say 2 females on each school committee. No school committee head was female and only one secretary. The reasons for 13 female treasurers are unclear. Were they thought to be more trustworthy or capable with money? They were not necessarily school staff or with a post-school education, either.
12 Suhero, no date. "Report on School Committee"
|
